Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1887-06-09

love and affection or rather moved by
love and affection toward his wife, and
the present being made at her solicita-
/ ton
THAT she may solicit such things l
think there can be no controversy. At
her solicitation and moved by his love
and affection for her, he made her this
voluntary deed of gift for the ranch in
Delta. Aud the court can not say that
there was any fraud used to obtain that
gift.
The evidence satisfies this court that
after that time this feeling which is des-
crlbed by the defendant herself as love
and affection, but which the court can
not say was love and affection, but
only oleraiion-simply liberation of the
! presence of this man in view of the fact
that he was her husband, and that this
feeling had been undergoing. perhaps
prior to this time, somewhat of \
change, the feeling of moderation
growing into gradual indifference TO
him and his interests. and this growing
ia degrees until it passed the line of in
| difference and became dislike and
ripened from that into antipathy and
disgust and despair; and that she
reached point where hate became the
dominant passion-hate toward him,
utter dislike, utter disgust; and that
| then she conceived the design that she
would obtain from him all that was
! possible and then desert and abandon
him
Tho court believes that that design
was formed and conceived after the
first conveyance of property, that it was
the natural and Legitimate and philoso-
phical outgrowth OF this frame Of mind,
which tho defendant herself admits,
that ripened into a purpose and design
to obtain from him further property and
then leave him and cease to live with
him.
''The mere matter Of whether she
purposed to get a divorce or not does
not cut much figure. The gSt OF this
is: Did she intend to live with him as
his wife, or to abandon him personally,
! either with or without a divorce, it
doesn't matter?
THE court can not believe that this
little episode about the carriage and
/ horse on that February day was the real
cause of her first desire for separation;
it is entirely too trivial-too flimsy. A
woman who had received from her hus-
band property to the amount of 81, 900
or $1S,000, and $4,000 or $1,000 of
that within week or ten days next be-
fore this occurrence would hardly, for
the reason that he refused to let her
ride on some particular afternoon, con-
ceived so suddenly in her mind the idea
of an entire separation and divorce.
1t is utterly impossible in the mind of
the court that that was the cause of the
quarrel. The design had been formed
perhaps at the time or near the time when
one witness declares that defendant ex-
pressed desire that plaintiff should fall
down the mine or be killed in some way.
1t appears that at about that time, after
this first conveyance was made, the
thought of when it broke perhaps more
| fully upon her vision of this interminable
companionship with this man, SO long
as they both should live, when it drove
her to despair and in desperation, wheth-
er rightfully or wrongfully, she conceived
/ the design of getting what she could and
then forever seperate from h4n.
GAS mere moral matter the court
does not look upon that as anything
particularly helnous that is, this change
of heart from liberation TO disgust. 1t
is one of the things that even philoso-
pliers can not trace; and the emotions Of
love and hate are entirely Independent
of will. 1t is not any particular act
that a person does that makes our love
or hate. 1t is an indeiinable something
"a force between two individuals that
causes these emotions of love and hate,
and no human philosophy can trace it..
So the mere fact of change doesn't appear
to the court to be particularly dark and
heinous; it is only the purpose that is
| formed as the result of this, and even
that may be eXcusable upon moral
grounds, if it is not upon legal ones-the
purpose, the design, that resulted from
| this disgust, that ended in despair and
in her getting property from her husband
to her own use and benefit and then
abandoning him and ceasing to live with
him as his wife. A ruse of loving.
lit appears that during the time in
tervening between the two conveyances
she did BY her acts at least, attempt to
and succeeded in making the plaintiff
| believe that she still loved him. And
the court can not believe for one mo-
ment that the plaintiff would, simple
minded as he appears, as unsophisticated
as the court believes him to be, yet if he
had known 1T the time when he made
this lasi,conveyance the real state offeel-
ing existing in his wifes mind toward
him, have made the conveyance of Feb.
| Is, 1886.
1.-THE court fails 10 discover any par
! ticularly offensive thing in the alleged
relations existing between this woman
| and Mitchell. Perhaps there was, but
the proof doesn't disclose it sufficiently
| to believe that it ever amounted to
criminal intimacy. There was doubt
less q fondness between them in the
minds of both. Perhaps there may
have been love, but at least it does not